Don’t get caught up in Barcelona hyperbole
Roar Guru By Ben Carter, 31 May 2011 Ben Carter is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- barcelona, Barcelona FC, Craig Foster, European football, football, Pep Guardiola, SBS, UEFA Champions League, UEFA Champions League final
2,951 reads
FC Barcelona's Lionel Messi of Argentina reacts after scoring his third goal against Arsenal. AP Photo/Manu Fernandez
I got up at 6.45am on Sunday morning – set my alarm and everything – expecting to see the last 15 minutes of this year’s Champions League final between Barcelona and Manchester United. What I got was UEFA president Michel Platini handing the cup over to Barcelona’s Lionel Messi, who raised it aloft.
So, Barca won then…
Fortunately, the SBS lads took those-who-missed-it-all through the goals, and it must be said that they were blistering strikes, and all seemingly from a fair way out as well, a good sign that modern forwards can still hit ‘em hard.
Anyway, barely three minutes after that first image of the cup being presented to Barcelona, SBS chief analyst Craig Foster launched into his now apparently usual Bill Lawry-esque la-la moment, declaring the Catalan side to be “the best ever,” the “greatest of all-time” and “from another planet” – where they still play football, funnily enough.
The game played by Barcelona was “absolutely pure,” according to the Fozz. Whatever that means.
Now, before any fellow Roarers get hackled-up about me, I must say that I admire Fozzie’s passion for the world game. I can also understand why he likes Barcelona – they supplied a fair slice of Spain’s World Cup-winning XI and have just won a fourth European Cup. But how can Fozz, on national telly, state that these guys are virtually the most ultra-evolved human beings on earth in such a split-second?
“A triumph for artistry, patience, imagination… Magnificent, actually,” said Rick Williams in London’s Guardian. That’s fair enough. Again, I’m not denying the result – even United boss Sir Alex Ferguson reckoned it was the best opposition he’d met in the last 25 years at this level – but one does wonder exactly how, statistically I mean, football fans and media pundits can make such sweeping statements so easily.
Football seems to be, at times, made up more of the personalities and the memorable matches, rather than quantifiable individual performances. Maybe that’s why it’s never quite gripped the average United States sports fan – it’s a very socialist activity, with everyone working together towards the aim of scoring a single quantifiable event – a goal. Yet, glance at the plethora of stats for a baseball, gridiron, basketball match and there’s plenty to chew on for comparison’s sake. Capitalism at its best – me first, etc.
Or, let’s use the cricketing analogy for something closer to home. Does anyone really recall many truly great one-day international contests? Twenty20s? Or even The Ashes? Sort of. They can become a bit of a blur, though. What do stand out are that dogged innings from Steve Waugh against England at wherever, the time Dean Jones pushed through sickness against India in season something or other…
When Ricky Ponting held aloft that little urn after being handed it by some cricketing administrator or another at the Sydney Cricket Ground after the 5-0 Test win in 2007, did Richie Benaud instantly claim that the Aussie XI would not only beat Don Bradman’s 1948 Invincibles, but also Warwick Armstrong’s side of the 1920s, and the 1970s Windies, and everyone else, and so on? Of course not. But at least there are series batting and bowling averages for fans to dip into and make imaginative merriment with.
That’s not the same in football, or at least, it didn’t feel like it to me when I heard Fozzie’s super-lauding of Barca. According to UEFA.com, the following categories applied in it’s official match statistics section related to Saturday’s final: goals scored, shots on target, shots off target, corners won, percentage of overall ball possession, fouls committed, yellow cards and red cards earned. I suppose what I’m asking is, is that enough?
I’d like to know exactly how, in an obvious moment of absolute Catalunyan adulation, Craig Foster could say that the 2011 ECL-winning Barcelona XI would undoubtedly beat – all things being equal, man for man – the Man United side of 1999, Real Madrid of 1960, Liverpool of 1984 and AC Milan of 1989, the Ajax of 1972, the Celtic of 1967, Notts Forest 1979, the George Best United of 1968? And, by ‘eck, even Barcelona 2006? (all listed among the top 30 XIs since the game began by The Daily Mail in a 2009 feature). That is a huge call to make, Sir.
“No disgrace for United to be beaten by the best club side in history,” said the Mirror’s Mike Colvin.
“Barcelona answered the call of history, and ended football’s most enticing debate. The identity of the greatest club side was revealed… A team that deserves to be rated beyond Pele’s Santos, Di Stefano’s Real Madrid, Cruyff’s Ajaz and Gullit’s AC Milan.”
Colvin continued, calling it the best club football game he’d seen in 25 years.
Tom Smithies joined in for Melbourne’s Herald Sun. “Sometimes there is no denying the course of history,” he wrote. “Barcelona are, officially, the best team in the world.”
But are they really? Really? How can they all be so utterly sure?
Barcelona boss Pep Guardiola was more measured, telling Associated Press reporters that he was not certain whether his side was indeed the greatest thing in the known universe.
“It is impossible to say,” he said. “I didn’t see the Real Madrid of Di Stefano and the Ajax of Cruyff. We try to play as well as possible. I hope in the next 10 or 15 years the people will remember them and have enjoyed them.”
The next 10 or 15 years. Guardiola’s got it right. That’s how long it might take to truly compare Barcelona v.2011 to everyone else on earth. Not three minutes, Fozz.
Proclamations about being the best of all time are well and good, but keep some statistical perspective (please, wherever possible).
Passionate about your football? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily football email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
May 31st 2011 @ 11:29am
Pano777 said | May 31st 2011 @ 11:29am | Report comment
Ben, Watched the game and gotta admit, i have been swept up in the barca wave for quite a while. I undersand what you’re saying and, agree that in most sports, the hyperbole gets a bit much. However, this team is the real deal. Why? Cause, they are big name players who perform in big games. Also, they are happy to do the boring 1%ers. You know, Messi chasing the defenders high up into the pitch in the first 5-10 mins of the game. Most forwards cant be bothered with this sort of stuff. Rooney, Ronaldo, Kanu, Totti etc just want to sit in the box and look great for the clinical finish. Messi was doing the hard yards like a first time senior player. What committment. And then, when he has the opportunity to attack, he glides and dances past blokes like turnstiles. I’m sorry, but he’s the complete forward. Then there’s Xavi, Iniesta, Piquet and all of them are value-added position players. They do their job, and more. I agree with the earlier comment about them playing with one man down, as they always appear to have 12 men on! Its that level of passion , tema spirit that has been embedded in these blokes that makes this team special. No passengers. No prima donnas. The way football should be played. Go out to win. Amazing.
May 31st 2011 @ 12:38pm
Dan said | May 31st 2011 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
“Football seems to be, at times, made up more of the personalities and the memorable matches, rather than quantifiable individual performances. Maybe that’s why it’s never quite gripped the average United States sports fan – it’s a very socialist activity, with everyone working together towards the aim of scoring a single quantifiable event – a goal. Yet, glance at the plethora of stats for a baseball, gridiron, basketball match and there’s plenty to chew on for comparison’s sake. Capitalism at its best – me first, etc.”
This is both true and false in my opinion. Football is structurally more “socialist” in terms of the way the actual game is played and how scoring occurs, but organisationally it is the most brutally capitalist game on the planet. Ironically, American Football – for all its micro-managing madness, over-specialised skills and baffling playbooks that are as long as encyclopaedias – is organisationally far more socialist in so far as the NFL essentially represents a closed system in which the governing body enforces a level of equality that makes the dominance of any one team very difficult. The Americans would hate to admit it I’m sure, but THAT is socialist, whilst the Europeans are blatantly pro-market capitalists; they allow mega wealthy teams to buy all the best players and thus ensure only a select few at the very top ever taste glory.
As to the point of the over all article though, I don’t know if it’s really worth writing an entire piece on Fozz’s penchant for hyperbole… the man is an emotional chap and tends to overstate most things
.
May 31st 2011 @ 1:00pm
foraggio said | May 31st 2011 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Cruyff’s Ajaz? Who were they?
May 31st 2011 @ 1:24pm
Ben Carter said | May 31st 2011 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
Obviously not the washing-up detergent company! Typo!
May 31st 2011 @ 1:04pm
Ben of Phnom Penh said | May 31st 2011 @ 1:04pm | Report comment
I think it’s a bit harsh to deride commentators who are caught up in the passion of the moment. It was a superb display and I’m sure we were all spouting platitudes whilst the pounding of blood was still ringing in our ears. To ask for a cold, hard analysis at the end of the match is unreasonable.
We want passionate commentators, not auditors.
May 31st 2011 @ 2:17pm
Gus said | May 31st 2011 @ 2:17pm | Report comment
A piece written by a bloke who 1 knows nothing about football & 2 knows nothing about football, I’d say stick to your statistical sports that you seem to know well, otherwise take some time to understand the game before you judge expert analysts about their comments.
May 31st 2011 @ 2:36pm
Ben Carter said | May 31st 2011 @ 2:36pm | Report comment
Hi Gus – thanks for your opinion. I’m not quite sure, however, that based on airing this one fan question that it can be deduced that I know zero about the entire sport – twice over. I’d like to continue to stick to simply being a sports fan – imperfect, yes, but a fan nevertheless, just like everyone else here. I don’t have a skewed personal preference for “statistical sports” either, although I will happily own up to saying that cricket is my personal favourite (and everyone has one I’m sure). As mentioned previously here, I was merely airing a question about how such statements as “best ever” are made – and sometimes, in this case, quite rapidly. I even mentioned in my post that I admire Fozzie’s passion for the game.
May 31st 2011 @ 3:21pm
dasilva said | May 31st 2011 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
The problem is that this article would have been a bit better if you have actually watch the match
I mean, if you had watch the match and then said, they aren’t the best side as you have seen Ajax 95 and the 3 peat in the 70′s and the Madrid 60′s and the Brazil 82 sides are better or just as good. THen perhaps that would have been a good place to start
I admit I haven’t seen those sides play but when you here people who have been around for a long time and not just Craig Foster going on about this is the best side in the history of the game. Alex fergurson said they are the best side in the last 25 years which is no easy task
It would have been interesting seeing what Les Murray think as he has seen the legendary Madrid side and he is able to compare
May 31st 2011 @ 3:30pm
Ben Carter said | May 31st 2011 @ 3:30pm | Report comment
Hi Dasilva – fair point about Fergie – and especially Les! It’d definitely be one thing for Fozz to say so and another entirely for Mr Murray himself to directly sift the best of the best between that Real team and the 2011 Barca line-up
May 31st 2011 @ 3:48pm
dasilva said | May 31st 2011 @ 3:48pm | Report comment
I will say that it’s very hard to compare teams of the past today as the tactics they play are very different and often modern tactics are build on exploiting the flaws of the previous system in play.
Let say a team like Hungarian of 1954 which is considered one of the great side in the history of football (even if they didn’t win the World Cup). They destroyed the ENglish in their own home turf with their passing and movement and showed the flaws of the strict rigid man-marking system.
However since virtually every major team today plays a zonal marking system nowadays would that team be just an average or below average team today. Would they get hammered if you transport them today and play against Barcalona?
Also is that a fair way of comparing teams from different eras? There are a lot of people who maintain that the great Madrid side of the 60′s would not be able to handle the speed, fitness and lack of space given to flair players of modern football. However those same people who believe that also maintain that the Madrid team is the best team in history because they dominated their era nad that is a better way of comparing team between different eras instead of a fantasy transplanting their team in a straight match up
May 31st 2011 @ 4:06pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | May 31st 2011 @ 4:06pm | Report comment
Hey Ben …
This is how a musical maestro differentiates between “good” and “great” musicians/orchestras …
Iván Fischer, who founded the Budapest Festival Orchestra in 1983 said:
“For me, the difference between good orchestras and great orchestras is obvious: in good orchestras musicians may get it right, but in great orchestras they offer that special ‘extra’. It’s the musicians’ personal involvement, imagination, intuition, and ability to take risks that makes a great orchestra what it is: a group of creative artists.”
———–
Perhaps, we can apply the same to football teams? Yes … I’d like to think so!
Source: http://www.monteverdi.tv/royal-concertgebouw-orchestra/gramophone.php
May 31st 2011 @ 4:51pm
Al said | May 31st 2011 @ 4:51pm | Report comment
I hope you got the chance to watch the whole game by now, it is generally a good idea to watch a game before telling people how they should feel about it and what they should or should not think.
They are in the discussion for best of all time. That is not hyperbole, that is a fact.
May 31st 2011 @ 8:57pm
Ben Carter said | May 31st 2011 @ 8:57pm | Report comment
I’m not intending to tell anyone else how they should feel or what to think. I’m airing a question about how easily/difficult it could be to make such a call on one team so quickly after said result. And the “hyperbole” headline was not my own.
May 31st 2011 @ 6:02pm
Brian said | May 31st 2011 @ 6:02pm | Report comment
Well anyone who has followed the game will know that due to the advent of capitalism today’s top teams are superiour to those of by-gone eras. If were talking about Real, Ajax, Liverpool or even AC Milan, these were teams “man for man” limited by quotas on foreigners. In the 1950s-1990s many players in the world’s top 200 played for lowly clubs. The Le Tissier’s & Pele’s no longer hang around thier upbringings.
Berbatov, Affelay & Kaka all sit on the bench because thats where the $$$ are. So Fozzie is absolutely right, by conquoring the modern era Barcelona are the best ever. The only cmoparision if at all would be made against the Brazil 1970 WC winning team.
So with that appreciation, Barca simply are the best ever full stop. I BTW was going for Man U & Real Madrid in the SF but it does not mean we can be blind to the domination we continuosly see
May 31st 2011 @ 9:05pm
Marcel said | May 31st 2011 @ 9:05pm | Report comment
the cricket analogy is an interesting one..and for me personally I think, for all their success, Barca are more Geoff Boycott than Viv Richards.
May 31st 2011 @ 9:35pm
preciouspress said | May 31st 2011 @ 9:35pm | Report comment
Another mindless comparison. Barcelona are a team of 11 very good with some great players who combine to become much more than the sum of their parts. Geoff Boycott was a dedicated, skilful artisan, Richards a wonderfully aggressive batsman, Neither were great team players and as such, even if they could cross the sport species would not have made a Barcelona, or indeed a United team.
May 31st 2011 @ 10:12pm
Marcel said | May 31st 2011 @ 10:12pm | Report comment
PP my point was that In my opinion Barca are effective but dull…no need for the insults buddy.
June 1st 2011 @ 9:56pm
Jupiter53 said | June 1st 2011 @ 9:56pm | Report comment
I’m sorry that I have been working and unable to read comments until a day late…..
but…… DULL!?!?
If they’re dull, who do you think is exciting?
June 1st 2011 @ 11:23pm
Marcel said | June 1st 2011 @ 11:23pm | Report comment
Brasil 82…now that was an exciting team.
I think true beauty in life/sport/love requires risk taking….and tika taka is primarily about eliminating risk and denying the opponent opportunities. I admire the technical brilliance of what they do and how they do it…..but as a philosophy its heart and soul is about not losing as a first priority. Ive been following Barca since Cruyff moved there in the 70s ….I just prefer my sport with a little more bravery.
May 31st 2011 @ 9:20pm
preciouspress said | May 31st 2011 @ 9:20pm | Report comment
A man who can’t be bothered to get up early enough to see the match, quibbles about the judgements of others who watch and understand. Let him challenge my considered opinion based upon watching football for over 60 years. I have followed Manchester United and gloried in the talents of Edwards, Colman, Charlton, Best, Cantona and Scholes. I well remember the night Di Stefan shone for Real to blitz Eintracht Frankfurt. Then there was the Puskas/Hideguti Hungary and the Pele/Garrincha Brazil.
None of the above come near to the current Barcelona team, who’s individual skills, team harmony and commitment is beyond compare. They made a very good United team seem unfit for our A league. Mr Carter don’t bother watching a game you clearly don’t get.
May 31st 2011 @ 9:54pm
The Cattery said | May 31st 2011 @ 9:54pm | Report comment
Respect your comments there preciouspress.
I’d like to throw one thing into the mix, if I may, that is somewhat at odds with the whole “pure artistry” line, and that is the fact that Barca press better than any other team, they constrict the space better than any othere team, they work harder than any other team at sucking the life out of their opposition, ensuring that no air pockets remain for survivors.
That’s a very well drilled team there. Not only are they well drilled in a certain game plan that pretty much no other team has worked out (yet), but they have the capability to stick it out for the full 90 to 120 minutes.
To me at least, that’s a sure sign that we’ve move well beyond “pure artistry”, and are fair square in the elite sporting realm.
June 1st 2011 @ 9:03am
Ben Carter said | June 1st 2011 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Hi Preciouspress – I’m not challenging your opinion – and it’s kinda sad that you would like me to not “bother” watching football. And that you believe that I do not understand or “get” it at all. It’s one thing for me to state honestly at the outset of my piece that I did not see the entire match (and I was merely being honest) but another to suggest that I shouldn’t watch the sport again. Personally, I quite like the world game and would love to bother watching it more often, when I get the chance to do so. And yes, as noted earlier, I’ve been enjoying the game on and off since the 1990 World Cup was screened on SBS. Saw South Korea-Chile in Adelaide as part of the 2000 Sydney Olympics, when I lived in SA I also attended (roughly) one Adelaide United match every 6 weeks or so. So yes, I enjoy the sport. No, I did not see the match in question on this occasion, which I honestly referred to. Neither should imply that I can’t choose to continue taking an interest in football.
June 1st 2011 @ 9:37am
Ben Carter said | June 1st 2011 @ 9:37am | Report comment
Actually, I’d like to add that one of the reasons why I joined The Roar was for interesting debate on sporting topics – hopefully avoiding the simple “my sport is the best in the entire galaxy and yours isn’t” stuff often seen in the comments section of the Herald Sun/Advertiser (for example). Rather, it should be closer to a “you can all enjoy sport and get something out of it and it can be fun to discuss, can’t it?” style, I reckon. Anyway, that’s the bit I found slightly frustrating – a presumed football fan telling another person who admits to liking the sport that they shouldn’t watch it.
June 1st 2011 @ 11:04am
preciouspress said | June 1st 2011 @ 11:04am | Report comment
Ben, methinks thou protest too much. Watch if you must but spare us your ignorant appraisals.
June 1st 2011 @ 11:10am
Ben Carter said | June 1st 2011 @ 11:10am | Report comment
So now I am permitted to at least “watch if I must?” sounds a tad unfair. And is the kind of statement not geared to getting other people to learn to love the world game. Again, I don’t think anyone should be denied the chance to enjoy sport – or discussing sport-related topics. And I don’t think I am an entirely ignorant person who couldn’t form an opinion about football. Sure, I write more often about cricket, but there should be no particular reason why I (or yourself, or anyone else) can’t enjoy contributing to this site. Point taken by those miffed about me not watching the match itself (as I’ve said) although my main issue was with how people can quantify (and so apparently quickly) a best-ever performance in this particular sport. Not whether Barca are good (they are) or whether football isn’t fun to watch (it is) or whether Foster isn’t passionate (he is).
June 1st 2011 @ 10:17pm
Jupiter53 said | June 1st 2011 @ 10:17pm | Report comment
Good question you are asking [if I understand it correctly]; that is how do you compare teams and judge relative merits, and do statistics help?
As has been pointed out above there are statistics available which point out things like numbers of passes, successful completion of passes, shots on target, shots off target, tackles and intercepts won, distance run etc. etc..
They do give some concrete assistance to back up an impression of the course of a game.
However I think judgments of how good a team is comes down to style as well as success.
I have been watching football since the 1960s. I think there are other teams I have seen that might have given Barcelona tough competition, but I would expect Barcelona to win. I have never seen another team with their combination of intensity of effort in defense and sustained and varied pressure in attack. They have an extraordinary quality of player with Messi as good as anyone I’ve ever seen, but all working with an amazing collective intelligence.
In my opinion [and it is an aesthetic statement] I have never seen a better team, or a team better to watch. And just as importantly in judging how good they are, I’ve never seen a team more likely to win.
No statistics needed for that judgment.